JetBlue Putative Class Action Claims Blue Fares Promised Free Seat Selection That Passengers Never Got, Kohanof v. JetBlue, Claims, Who May Qualify and Case Status

JetBlue Airways Corporation faces a putative class action alleging it sold higher-priced Blue fares advertised as including “free seat selection,” then accepted payment without telling the customer that no standard seat was available to select. The case is Kohanof v. JetBlue Airways Corporation, Case No. 2:26-cv-09701, filed August 31, 2026 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Plaintiff Saman Kohanof is represented by Leon Ozeran of The Law Offices of Leon Ozeran.

The plaintiff does not claim JetBlue must open every seat for free selection. His argument is narrower: if the advertised benefit could not be used, JetBlue should have said so before taking the money. Everything below is an allegation. No class has been certified and no court has found JetBlue liable.

Case-status caution: A third-party docket index reportedly lists a “Dismiss Case” entry dated October 29, 2026 (Document No. 14). We could not review that filing, and we have not verified any order dismissing the case. See the status section below before treating the case as active or ended.

Kohanof v. JetBlue Airways Corporation: Quick Facts

Item	Detail
Case name	Kohanof v. JetBlue Airways Corporation
Case number	2:26-cv-09701 (also written 2:26-cv-9701)
Court	U.S. District Court for the Central District of California
Filed	August 31, 2026
Plaintiff	Saman Kohanof, a California resident
Defendant	JetBlue Airways Corporation
Plaintiff’s attorney	Leon Ozeran, The Law Offices of Leon Ozeran
Judge	Reported as Judge Christina A. Snyder; confirm on the docket
Federal court basis	28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversity), breach of contract, per the docket listing
Fare at issue	Blue fare, about $379 in the plaintiff’s booking
Cheaper comparison fare	Blue Basic (no free seat selection)
Booking channel	JetBlue mobile app, February 2026
Reported claims	Breach of express contract, breach of implied-in-fact contract, promissory estoppel
Amount alleged	More than $5 million for the proposed class
Jury trial	Demanded by plaintiff
Class certification	None verified
Settlement	None verified

The public docket listing is available on Justia Dockets. The Justia page was last retrieved on August 31, 2026, so it shows only the filing-day entries.

What Happened to Saman Kohanof When He Booked a JetBlue Blue Fare?

According to the complaint as reported, Kohanof used JetBlue’s mobile app in February 2026 to book a one-way flight, reportedly from Fort Lauderdale to Los Angeles. The app showed two options: Blue Basic, which did not include free seat selection, and Blue, which advertised “Free seat selection.” He chose Blue at about $379 because of that benefit.

After payment, he alleges the standard seats appeared unavailable on the seat map, and JetBlue assigned him a seat, the same treatment he says Blue Basic passengers receive. Choosing a remaining seat would have cost extra. He says JetBlue did not warn him before purchase, and that his later request to the airline produced no refund, credit or other compensation. He alleges he would have bought the cheaper fare or traveled another way had he known.

Why Sue JetBlue If the Airline Still Gave Him a Seat?

The dispute is about the difference between being assigned a seat and being given the chance to choose one, which the plaintiff says he paid extra for. If a Blue passenger and a Blue Basic passenger end up with the same assigned-seat treatment, he argues the higher fare delivered nothing for that benefit.

The complaint does not challenge JetBlue’s right to hold back seats for operational, safety or other legitimate reasons. It targets the alleged failure to disclose, before payment, that the advertised selection benefit was unavailable.

How Did JetBlue’s Blue and Main Fares Change in 2026?

JetBlue announced a new fare-shopping structure on July 27, 2026, replacing the Blue Basic and Blue labels.

Fare structure	Seat selection
Old: Blue Basic	Not included
Old: Blue	Included without a selection fee
New: Main Base	Fee applies
New: Main	Included
New: Main Flex	Included

JetBlue’s fare pages say bookings made on or before July 29, 2026 keep the benefits of the fare purchased. The February 2026 booking in this case falls under the old Blue structure. The complaint reportedly notes the new structure still advertises free seat selection on higher fares without always explaining availability limits. Renaming the fares does not decide what JetBlue owed passengers who bought under the old system.

What Legal Claims Does the JetBlue Lawsuit Make?

Reporting on the complaint describes three contract-based theories:

1. Breach of express contract. The plaintiff says the free seat selection was part of the Blue fare bargain. In California, breach of contract generally requires a contract, the plaintiff’s performance or excuse, the defendant’s breach and resulting harm (CACI No. 303).
2. Breach of implied-in-fact contract. An agreement may arise from the parties’ conduct, such as an advertised fare option, payment and the airline’s acceptance (see CACI No. 302 on contract formation).
3. Promissory estoppel. A remedy where a clear promise reasonably relied on causes harm and injustice can be avoided only by enforcing the promise.

Some summaries of the complaint also mention possible California consumer-protection theories for a California subclass. We have not confirmed that from the complaint itself. If the plaintiff did plead them, they would typically arise under California’s Unfair Competition Law (Business and Professions Code § 17200) or Consumers Legal Remedies Act (Civil Code § 1750 et seq.).

Which Federal Laws Could Shape the JetBlue Class Action?

Airline Deregulation Act, 49 U.S.C. § 41713(b)(1). This statute preempts certain state-law requirements related to an airline’s prices, routes or services. In American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219 (1995), the Supreme Court allowed ordinary breach-of-contract claims enforcing an airline’s own voluntary promises. In Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, 572 U.S. 273 (2014), it held that a state-law claim that tries to expand those voluntary obligations can be preempted. Because this case centers on JetBlue’s own advertised fare benefit, Wolens is the plaintiff’s likely anchor. JetBlue may argue the claims or remedies go beyond that.

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. Filing as a class does not make a class. The plaintiff must show numerosity, commonality, typicality and adequacy under Rule 23(a), and for damages, that common questions predominate and a class action is superior under Rule 23(b)(3). The plaintiff points to standardized booking screens. JetBlue may argue that seat availability varied by flight, date and booking.

Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d). CAFA allows certain class actions in federal court when the amount in controversy exceeds $5 million, among other requirements. The $5 million figure is a jurisdictional allegation, not an amount JetBlue owes.

Department of Transportation authority, 49 U.S.C. § 41712. The DOT can investigate and stop unfair or deceptive practices in air transportation. That is a regulatory route, not a private damages claim for passengers.

What Is JetBlue’s Response to the Seat Selection Lawsuit?

In a statement reported by Inc. on September 16, 2026, JetBlue said it “would never intentionally mislead our customers” and works to clearly communicate fare benefits, and it declined to comment on the pending allegations. We have not verified any court filing by JetBlue answering the complaint. Defenses that could arise include fare terms limiting guarantees, seat-availability limits, differences among individual bookings and arguments against class certification.

Who Could Be Included in the Proposed JetBlue Class?

The complaint proposes a nationwide class, plus California and JetBlue mobile-app subclasses, of passengers who bought Blue or Blue Extra (or equivalent) fares advertised with free seat selection but were not given a free advance selection opportunity when none was available, without pre-purchase disclosure. These are proposed definitions that the court has not approved.

You may have a similar experience if you paid for a fare advertised with free advance seat selection and were assigned a seat without being offered an eligible standard seat to choose. You may not fit if you bought Blue Basic or Main Base, were offered standard seats and declined them, or your dispute was only about a premium or extra-legroom seat. These are not eligibility determinations, and the final definition could change.

How Much Money Is Kohanof Seeking From JetBlue?

The complaint alleges more than $5 million for the proposed class and seeks class certification, appointment of Kohanof as class representative, compensatory or benefit-of-the-bargain damages, restitution and other relief, with a jury trial. Benefit-of-the-bargain damages compare what was promised with what was delivered. No individual payment amount has been set, and nothing is guaranteed.

Latest Status of Kohanof v. JetBlue (Case No. 2:26-cv-09701)

The filing-day docket shows the complaint, civil cover sheet, notice of interested parties and summons request. A later third-party docket index reportedly lists, for October 29, 2026, “Document No. 14: Dismiss Case” and “Document No. 15: Certificate/Notice of Interested Parties.” We could not open that index or the filing, and the label does not say whether it is a motion, a notice of voluntary dismissal or a court order.

As of October 31, 2026:

• The putative class action was filed on August 31, 2026.
• A dismissal-related entry has reportedly appeared. Its nature is unverified.
• No order dismissing the case has been verified.
• No class certification and no settlement have been verified.

A motion to dismiss, a voluntary dismissal and a dismissal order have very different legal effects. Check Document No. 14 and later entries on PACER and the Central District of California’s electronic filing system before relying on this section.

Can JetBlue Passengers Join the Kohanof Lawsuit Now?

No claim form or court-approved class registration process has been verified. Do not pay any website that claims to register you for an official JetBlue seat-selection settlement. If you had a similar experience, keep:

• your booking confirmation and fare name
• screenshots of the fare options and the seat-selection page
• payment receipts and any seat fees paid
• your assigned seat details
• JetBlue emails and any complaint reference numbers and responses

Related Airline Consumer Lawsuits Covered by AllAboutLawyer

• JetBlue Allegedly Used Customers’ Personal Data to Raise Pricing For Ticket’s, JetBlue Class Action Lawsuit, What Flyers Need to Know
• Delta Airlines Sued Over Refund Tricks Did You Get Cheated?
• Delta $78.75M Fuel Dump Settlement: Claims Closed

These are separate cases and do not make anyone eligible for the Kohanof case.

Frequently Asked Questions About the JetBlue Free Seat Selection Lawsuit

Is JetBlue facing a class action over free seat selection?

A putative class action, Kohanof v. JetBlue Airways Corporation, was filed on August 31, 2026 alleging JetBlue sold fares promising free seat selection without disclosing that no standard seats were available. No class has been certified.

What is the case number and court?

Case No. 2:26-cv-09701, U.S. District Court for the Central District of California.

How much is the lawsuit seeking?

The complaint alleges an amount in controversy above $5 million for the proposed class. No payout amount has been set.

Does JetBlue have to make every seat available for free selection?

No. The lawsuit does not claim that. It challenges the alleged failure to disclose that the advertised benefit was unavailable before payment.

Does the new Main Base fare affect the case?

The case concerns a February 2026 Blue booking. Under the new structure, Main Base charges a seat-selection fee, while Main and Main Flex include selection.

Has JetBlue settled or has the court dismissed the case?

No settlement is verified. A dismissal-related entry dated October 29, 2026 has been reported by a third-party docket index, but a dismissal order has not been verified.

Can I join the lawsuit?

There is no certified class or official claim process. If you had a similar experience, preserve your records and consider speaking with an attorney.

What should I do if I bought a Blue fare and was assigned a seat?

Save the confirmation, fare description, seat-map screenshots, receipts and JetBlue correspondence.

What Happens Next in Kohanof v. JetBlue?

The first question is what the October 29 entry actually is and whether the court acts on it. If the case continues, JetBlue’s response, any motion practice and eventually a class-certification fight under Rule 23 will decide whether this can proceed as a class. The central factual issue is what customers saw before paying, and whether the system showed that no qualifying seats were available. No compensation is guaranteed.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and AllAboutLawyer.com is not a law firm. Case status can change quickly.

Sources and Legal Authorities

1. Justia Dockets: Kohanof v. Jetblue Airways Corporation, 2:2026cv09701 (C.D. Cal.)
2. PACER and the Central District of California electronic filing system (for Document No. 14 and later entries)
3. PEOPLE: JetBlue Faces $5 Million Lawsuit Claiming Airline Charged Extra for ‘Free Seat Selection’ It Didn’t Provide (September 16, 2026)
4. Inc.: JetBlue Promised Free Seat Selection on a $379 Fare. A Lawsuit Claims a Passenger Never Got to Choose
5. JetBlue: Our Fares and JetBlue’s July 27, 2026 fare announcement
6. 49 U.S.C. § 41713 and 49 U.S.C. § 41712
7. 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23
8. American Airlines, Inc. v. Wolens, 513 U.S. 219 (1995) and Northwest, Inc. v. Ginsberg, 572 U.S. 273 (2014)
9. California CACI Nos. 302 and 303; California Business and Professions Code § 17200; California Civil Code § 1750 et seq.

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the federal court docket record for Case No. 2:26-cv-09701 (filing-day entries) and published reporting on the complaint, as of October 31, 2026. Docket entries after August 31, 2026, including the reported October 29 entry, could not be reviewed. Last Updated: October 31, 2026.